Saturday, April 16, 2016

Today (April 14) Syria held parliamentary elections at 7,000 polling stations, keeping the voting open an extra five hours to accommodate the massive turnout. All were allowed to vote, even displaced Syrians from the two provinces still terrorized by Washington and Israeli backed ISIS.

Washington is angry, because Syria held elections before Washington had time to purchase its slate of politicians and organize Washington-funded NGOs to take to the streets to protest and to claim that Assad had stolen the election.

Despite the massive voter turnout and extended hours for voting, the US State Department set the tone by declaring that the elections are not legitimate in Washington’s eyes and do not represent “the will of the Syrian people.”

Washington’s two-bit punk vassals in London and Paris chimed in with both claiming that the war conditions in Syria to which London and Paris have contributed mean that the idea of elections is “totally unrealistic.”

The New York Times lied, characteristically, that the elections, which seem to demonstrate nationwide solidarity against the Western-backed overthrow of the Syrian government, “highlight divisions and uncertainty.” The Washington Post added its lies and misrepresentations to the propagandistic reporting.

The Western governments are far out on a limb with their lies that the Syrian people prefer to be governed by the Washington supported terrorists who were overrunning their country and conducting with Western supplied weapons mass murder on the Syrian people until Russia put a stop to it. Now the Western liars are exposed yet again by election results, and so the liars must pretend that the election lacks validity.

So, Republicans are in the fascinating position of arguing that Syria's elections, which actually allow people to vote, are illegitimate and do not represent "the will of the people" because "war conditions", whereas the Republican nomination in Colorado, where no one is even voting, is legitimate and does represent "the will of the people" despite the people having no voice because "rules".

And people wonder why Americans support a quixotic outsider like Donald Trump. I vote for a blind and incontinent basset hound before I'd vote for any member of the Republican establishment, which now observably includes Ted Cruz. Of course, if I lived in Colorado, I wouldn't be able to vote at all.

This isn't that hard. Yes, we all know America is not a democracy. The point is that if you're going to repeatedly go to war for democracy, then the first place you should do so is in the USA.

Socrates once had a chance to debate a person of great political power in Athens. Socrates thought that political power in the hands of people that do not know the difference between justice and injustice is a bad thing. He brought an example of Cleon an orator that had convinced the Athenians to execute all the males of some city that had rebelled. The decree was recalled when the Athenians came to their senses and sent a ship to overtake the first ship that had the first set of orders.

Shonky is not a word I had heard before, Weka, but the sentiment is clear and I have to say that this election cycle certainly sounds like it meets that criteria. Having observed elections in three countries as part of my job, I can say that as bad as they are in the U.S. they are worse in a lot of other places. (Not every place, obviously.) The treachery has to be a little bit more polished to work in the U.S. However, that doesn't excuse the U.S. We need to cleanse the inner vessel before worrying about what's festering in anyone else's crockery.

The Republican primary in Colorado was eliminated to save the taxpayers the expense of an election process. It may be reinstated. No one has asked about a third option. Why can't the two parties pay for their own primaries instead of the tax payers?

Fair point, Vox, but I'd rather see a war on the word "democracy" and any politicians who utter the word. Every American politician who even mentions the word "democracy" deserves to be taken out, beaten with a stick and forced to have a career change into picking rock and shoveling calf pens.

You know the typical response I get when I explain to someone that we do not live in a democracy? A look of total incomprehension.

Spent years trying to get "repeal the 17th amendment" on the MN GOP party platform. Converted a good number of people but talk about an uphill battle, because even hard working political delegates have bought into this stupid idea that democracy is a good thing and we are one.

Don't let your pro-Trump views blind you to reality.1. The Republican Party (in CO, as elsewhere) is a private organization, not a government, so comparing it to elections held elsewhere is ridiculous. The CO GOP needs to follow its rules for selecting delegates to the national convention. Those rules were set early last year for what candidates needed to do (get GOP members to precinct caucuses). Trump's campaign seems to be ineffectual and clueless when it comes to delegate selection processes which haven't changed in a long time (CO didn't have a binding Presidential primary vote, just a straw poll in the past).2. The GOP voters at the precinct caucuses were overwhelmingly for Cruz. That's why pro-Cruz County delegates were mostly chosen by them to represent them, who in turn chose mostly pro-Cruz State delegates. Any Republican could have shown up and voted for a delegate at the Precinct Caucuses. The ones who did show up wanted people supporting Cruz to run the CO GOP, so that's what happened.3. This constant whining about losing makes Trump look weak and incompetent. Why is he playing the victim? He's only the victim of his own campaign's lack of organization and support and inability to get organized. It's like a team that loses a game complaining about too many offside calls going against them because the other side is playing an offside trap (well within the rules). Quit whining about being a loser, accept your legit losses, learn from your mistakes and get ready to play the next game (where you're favored to win).

Is there such a thing as a democracy? Ever??? I remember saying that Brazil was no democracy because we the people didn't vote directoy for the laws, then a fellow brazilian said I was wrong because we are a representative democracy. Well she had a good point, but I just couldn't shake the impression that she just said: "but of course we are a democracy, we are allowed to go into the store and choose what choose a product on the shelves made by the parties.... Alllll 25+ of them"

Politics the one place where competition absolutely fails to make the products better or cheaper

So I can only tip my hat to Vox when he correctly rejects pseudocracy.... And tight jeans...

another thing about the Colorado situation:it demonstrates Cruz's fundamental grasping and manipulative nature.

how? because Ted went in there and campaigned for delegates?

no. those were the rules and Ted was following the rules. and, since Ted had nothing to do with the rule change last August, you can't hold him to account for that.

no, you have to look at the negative space, at what SHOULD have been done but WAS NOT.

Ted should have campaigned for the delegates.

and then, when Trump complains about the Repug voters of CO being disenfranchised, Ted should have come out AND AGREED with Donald. and said that he had played the game the way the rules were laid out but that he didn't like them, and didn't agree with them or the principles ( or lack thereof ) behind them.

instead, what does he do? he calls Trump a 'whiner'. well, guess what Ted? there are a LOT of voters *in Colorado* who are 'whining' about their votes not being counted ... which means that Ted, via his actions, is forcing undecided voters to emotionally align themselves with Trump.

dumbass.

it is via this same "negative space" analysis that you can observe the fundamentally anti-Catholic nature of Pope Francis. what kind of a man can pretend that he is Roman Catholic when he advocates for policies that are pro-Jihad? remember, what Bergoglio is doing is much more than simply failing to call for Crusade, he is openly castigating European nations for not wanting to take even more Muslim "refugees" in.

by their fruits shall ye know them.

of course, Trump himself is not much of a Christian. but compared to what he's running against?

Bob - I've been fascinated by this election process and have seen a lot of Ted Cruz.

At first I thought his overly mannered style of speaking and odd facial expressions were an unfortunate legacy of his megachurch evangelist father. Something he might learn to loosen up from with practice speaking to wider audiences.

He was goofily endearing when he did those Simpsons impressions, after all. I really warmed to him on seeing that.

But the more I've watched Ted, the more I've become convinced he's on the spectrum. He's emotionally tone deaf. There's something profoundly... off... about him as a man.

For all I know he could be the staunchest, most scrupulous and superlatively trustworthy man in all of Texas. But you'd never think it from looking at him. Television is far less kind to him than it ever was to Richard Nixon, who may have been relatively low on charisma but at least projected himself like a leader of men.

I can't imagine Senator Cruz leading a platoon, never mind the United States.

Quite likely his appeal is lost in translation to Britonese, but according to the primary results so far it's also lost on most Americans.

What was beginning to look like a serious hit to the Trump "winning" narrative was quickly turned into a political advantage. With the op-ed piece in the WSJ, Trump has seized the narrative that Reagan used against Carter in 1980: "Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?" This is nothing short of brilliant on his part because it goes beyond just placing the blame on one side of the aisle for our current mess, it indicts the entire political class in DC. It also furthers a general election narrative against Clinton who admittedly would not be winning the nomination without the rigged super delegate selections. Trump2016!

You clearly don't understand the deeper issue here. Yes, of course Lyin' Ted followed the rules, but Trump is accurately pointing out the hypocrisy of the system, namely that a supposedly democratic organization has rules to select delegates in a very non-democratic (and insider driven) way. It all blows up and then these party insiders are surprised, just shows you how out of touch they are.

No, I just have no patience for those who prefer telling others what to do rather than getting off their fat asses and doing it. If you think you can do something better, great. Then do it. If you think something needs doing, great. Then do it. Don't tell me what I "should" or "need to" do.

Good question. Might be hard though as their military is largely stationed in US bases throughout the EUSSR - a quarter century after the Red Army went back home. NATO is the EUSSR's muscle, and the central committee of the EUSSR just made up of the same oligarchs as that of the USSA. Whatever her shortcomings may be, Barnhardt 'sprained how the 'erections' work here in Zombie-Banana Empire back in December 2012, shortly after the "opposition" party engineered a second term for Housenigga Hussein.

Each state party can set its own rules unique to that party. So, you are right that Colorado was done within the rules.

That's true for golf tournaments also. A local tournament is allowed to establish rules unique to its tournament. So, a local golf tournament could create rules stating:

1) players are disqualified for a hole in one2) players must keep their score in their head instead of a written scorecard3) players are allowed to "woo" the scorekeeper to better their score

Of course, any golf tournament that strayed that far from the normal and widely accepted rules out golf would lose its legitimacy. Oh, they would still be technically within the rules, but the golfing public would say the tournament was ILLEGITIMATE.

That is what Colorado has done. They are technically within the rules, but it strayed so far normal, commonly accepted rules that it has lost any veil of legitimacy.

I wonder if the Colorado primary would be seen as fundamentally illegitimate if Trump had won.

Also:

The Western governments are far out on a limb with their lies that the Syrian people prefer to be governed by the Washington supported terrorists who were overrunning their country and conducting with Western supplied weapons mass murder on the Syrian people until Russia put a stop to it.

That's quite a long, unwieldy sentence; maybe it was pithier in the original Russian.

It blows my mind that Republicans think repeatedly saying "Its the rules! Trump was unprepared! American people are just dumb!" is an effective retort to Trump's rhetorical onslaught about voter fraud and denying Coloradans the vote. Goddamn, it's no wonder Republicans have always lost if they thought the appearance of denying the vote could overcome "they stole the vote."

Cruz is not too blame for the Colorado rules. He simply was intelligent enough to pay attention and do a good job of working the rules that the Colorado pols adopted almost a year ago to benefit Bush or Rubio.

The fact that Trump chose to whine and complain instead of working the rules himself suggests to me that he knew he would have lost in an election. It was therefore much more efectacious to do more character assassination and get the public relations benefit. Mr. Trump has repeatedly taken advantage of bankruptcy rules to allow his corporations to escape paying debts owed. It is difficult for feel sympathy for Trump when he is on the receiving end of the same legal system.

"Candidate Pera obviously is a total poopy head for wanting to beat public servants... They are public slaves!" - Eduardo for prez 2016... Who cares if he is brazilian at least he is not Obama. Or HillBillary

In 2012 Santorum scored a surprise upset victory in Colorado caucus. To ensure that something like that never happened again, the Colorado GOP changed its rules to ensure ALL of Colorado's delegates would go to whoever Colorado GOP establishment wanted.

Of course, this cycle they were all supposed to go to Jeb, but since Jeb had dropped out, the delegates went to the new establishment favorite Cruz--every single one.

No amount of effort could have changed the outcome; could have wrested even one delegate away from Cruz, because Colorado was wired; Colorado was rigged; Colorado's results were determined before the process even started.

Cruz is just making a mess of things at this point. He may still achieve what he wants, but I suspect what he wants now are riots, martial law, coups and civil war. The sacking of DC opens up a military junta opportunity. Colorado was a test balloon.

I have been trying to peg the master plan for a few months, but now it seems clear.

Cubans are good at that sort of thing, and Canadians can pull it off under the cover of dorkiness.

How is any thing in Syria any business of the US government or responsibility of the US tax payer? I really don't care if Assad wins 300% of the vote, Syria is not my nation.

This. I don't care either. Demonstrably, the US government and UN don't care about most of Africa either - you know the bits where they routinely hack each other to pieces with farm tools.

If they hadn't destabilized Libya (who was paid to keep migrants on their side of the Mediterreanean) and fostered anti Assad forces in Syria/Iraq we wouldn't have 2 hot spots of "refugees" flooding into Europe. Now they want to accelerate the joining of the Turks to the EU. I'm sure the Turkish government will really care about keeping migrants in Turkey versus letting them roam into Europe after they join.

I'm usually not a consipracy theorist but you couldn't have made a worse mess of things if you actively tried. In that regard it doesn't pass the sniff test for me. I get it, dictators are bad, m'ok? You know what's worse? Civil wars. Perhaps the US government should stop causing so many.

Unlike Cruz, Trump is set to win this outright. Cruz keeps whining that Kasich should drop out, but the truth is that Cruz can't win either.

This is not Cruz's "great ground game". A great ground game wins by votes. The rules were changed to help Jeb or any other establishment politician win. Cruz is the establishment choice right now and is foolish enough to think those delegates support him. They don't.

The purpose of a political party is to win elections. When they chose to block a winning candidate to put up someone with no chance to win in the general, then that political party has no purpose.

It's lost to a lot of us here too. And I started out liking Cruz. I thought the Sabo poster of Cruz as the tatted up outsider was brilliant and I expected Cruz to run with that. But he didn't. He ran as the Huckabee/Santorum candidate.

Cruz can't run as an outsider because he isn't one. He is just so I likable that he can't get along with his colleagues. He's just like Obama in that he thinks he is the smartest man ever. And he and his wife use their girls like props. It's creepy. Nixon had a long record of accomplishments before he ran for President. Cruz can't be bothered to do his current job.

For all the lectures on trying to counter strong rhetoric with weak dialectic and failing, people still do the same thing.

Trump (rhetoric): They stole the election. Emotional. While technically false, who cares in rhetoric because its also true enough.

Anti-trump (dialiectic)1) It was the rules2) GOP is a private organization. Yeah keep that one up. Why do two private organizations have a monopoly (by any reasonable definition) on politics in the whole USA

Don't let your pro-Trump views blind you to reality.1. The Republican Party (in CO, as elsewhere) is a private organization, not a government, so comparing it to elections held elsewhere is ridiculous. The CO GOP needs to follow its rules for selecting delegates to the national convention.

@17 Thomas SewellNo, the GOP is a governmental organization -- you can't get into government without going through either the Dims or the GOP -- so your idea that it should be run like a private organization is ridiculous.

@29“but Trump is accurately pointing out the hypocrisy of the system, namely that a supposedly democratic organization has rules to select delegates in a very non-democratic (and insider driven) way. “

You mean like in Iowa? Look, Trump is whining and it does not redound to his benefit. The rules are what they are and CO GOP knew what those rules were, including those “voters” that are whining they were disenfranchised.

@31Grads from two libtard schools and we're supposed to be impressed they hate a conservative? Really?

@35How was it far outside the normal rules? No one else chooses delegates by Caucus?

@36I'd go for what went in H. Beam Pipers “Lone Star Planet.” If you're not familiar with the story, http://www.gutenberg.org/files/20121/20121-h/20121-h.htm

@39If you're into making leftard arguments, then “yelling it's the rules” will have no effect. The fact remains, those were the rules, and Trump face planted. I think he can afford it, but that's just me.

@43Indeed! But not for Trump in Colorado.

@44Really? And what causes you to “suspect” this is his desired outcome?

@48In some things that's true. So called free trade, for example. In immigration he's no worse than Trump, and in some ways better.

@49The same can be said for Trump. Rocks meet glass house.

@53In wouldn't expect a man that calls his “colleagues” liars, would get along well with them. The virtue of the statement is that they are liars, and he committed truth. The greatest sin in the District of Corruption is the commission of unapproved truth. The man is doing exactly what he was sent to DC to do, and it doesn't sit well with the ruling class.

How many times does this have to be repeated for you political autists? The rules are how they screw you. That's why they are there. To screw over thr non approved candidate, and lock in the approved candidate. That is why they can be changed, discarded or ignored as necessary by the party.

Ron Paul and his people did exactly as you say Trump and his people should have done. What happened to them?

How was it far outside the normal rules? No one else chooses delegates by Caucus?

@63 QuartermasterColorado didn't have caucuses. They had county conventions.

And you could argue until you're blue in the face that they could set the rules any way they want, but having a small elite group select the delegates rather than let voters have a primary makes the COGOP look even worse than the Soviet Communist Party.

That's all well and good, but then CO GOPers continued to run ads telling people to come down and vote because thier voices mattered. When private businesses pull that kind of bait and switch scam they are guilty of a crime. So why not th the CO GOPe?

Either they are a private org and committed false advertising or they are government org and need to be heavily regulated. You can't have it both ways.

Only black people can grasp racism and only women know misogyny when they see it. Best we leave policy and remediation of same to blacks and women; but only separately- Unless you're a black female in which case you DO get to decide on both racism and female-gender issues.

Being a white male I'm freed of agency in either case. Well, maybe not freed- But appropriately denied.

Being ex-Navy I DO get to provide input on matters of war which you, Vox, apparently do not. I also get to call bullshit on your story a recruiter tore up papers because you were too smart and too rich.

In all fairness, how your private club selects its candidate for an election is different than actually voting in an election.

I just wish the Democrats and Republicans would be honest and say,"Fsck off! The Party is our private club, and how we select OUR club candidate for President is none of your g'dam affair! Vote for whoever you feel like in the general election! Hell, write in your mama's name for all we care! But you damned 'entryist independents' are NOT going to pick OUR candidate for US."

"The train is fine" Yep, and both Trump and Cruz have had their turns at the throttle. If either is nominated I'll vote for him in a New York minute. Much better than the alternative.

However all of the Trumpster display of emotional, juvenile butthurt whenever Cruz does what Trump himself would have done, if it were to Trump 's benefit, is ridiculous.

Remember what Trump said of the investors, suppliers, and employees who lost money's when Trump 's corporations went bankrupt: "we're not talking about babies here" . Well the same is true of Trump himself. He is a calculating, brilliant man. So is Cruz.

How many different ways does it need to be explained? Yes, the rules were followed. How about you actually respond to the critique that the rules clearly violate the so-called principles of the Republican Party?

At least in caucus states there is a veneer of legitimacy to the process. Colorado clearly shows that the Republican Party isn't about principles, it's about maintaining their club, even at the expense of America.

@62: good luck with that "Dems and Pubs are really the government" stuff. I am looking to destroy them, not make friends with them or play alt-right entryist takeoverists with them.

I WANT them to declare that they are private clubs funded by banksta. It's the truth. And declaring the truth is the first step to their demise. That's what their "it's the rules"- speak means, after all.

Translated: "We are members of a private club. You aren't. We make 'the rules' of the club. You don't. So fsck off."

They desperately don't want to say that. So hold their feet to the fire. Make them say it. And organize your OWN club with their increasingly disaffected members.

"principles of the Republican party" ... where have you been for the last 7+ years? Why do you think Trump and Cruz are leading! Both have been pointing out for years that most Republicans appear to HAVE no principles. That was clearly revealed in Colorado, except Cruz hoisted the Bush/Rubio politicians with their own petard, and walked away with all of the delegates. Good for him. I am sure that Trump will pull off equally impressive feats in the states to come. My best guess is that Trump is going to be the nominee. If so, I will vote for him, if not I will still vote for the #not Hillary/Bernie candidate most likely to win.

Still waiting for the rules are rules people to come up with any rhetoric that will work to counter the perception of a rigged game.

In poker, an amateur vs a professional will not be close heads up. Unless you make a slight rule change that the amateur always has the button (acts last). At that point, most good amateurs will beat the pro and the pro knows it.

So why would a pro go into a game he knows he can't win? Because it might actually be 'fair' to the amateur finally?

This is rhetoric. "Syrians vote for Pariliament, Colorado Republicans don't get to vote". Yes, it can be argued this and that, and the train is still fine.

It's not dialectic. It's rhetoric. Drudge did it visually, running an image from the Iraqi election of a few years back of a woman with a purple finger right over the Colorado headline. It makes the point, and leaves supporters of the status quo floundering to catch up. As intended.

This. Exactly. Now we're back and many of us are, shall we say, much more hard core. The stupid GOP still hasn't recognized the pattern yet. Trump gets in Trump gets screwed, either way things are not going to trend the establishment's way. Kek. Kek. Kek.

Did you listen to talk radio at all this last week? Did you hear the CO Republican Chair was in hiding? Yes, this blew up in their faces. You just don't like it when Trump nails the GOPe with an effective rhetorical attack.

The Republican and Democratic parties set their own rules. If you vote for either of them, you are part of the problem. Regardless of what I think of Trump, I will never vote Republican or Democrat. Gary Johnson went full retard, so I'll probably just stay home. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Oh, it has, you just haven't noticed it yet. Trump is the sound of the explosion going off. You still have time to duck and cover, if you recognize that. If you don't, the blast wave will hit next election cycle.

Were-PuppyThis is a good example of rhetoric vs dialectic. The dialectic has a very hard time to beat the perception that rhetoric has given. It sounds like so much 'but... but... but..'

Yup. Eventually it winds up as … But…muh ROOLZ!

These ROOLZ were clearly intended to crown ¡Jeb! but I think they originated back when Tom Tancredo made much too good of a showing in Colorado. My impression of Colorado is that outside of Adams County, or even just upper crust Denver, a lot of the Dems are just as redneck as any Rethuglican.

The Californication of the state plus outside money from Bloomberg did have some effect, such as the mag ban, and it was the grassroots R's, D's and others who recalled a couple of State senators.

Oh, I just thought of a new category for many of us, the outsiders. We are For Unity. Yes, we wish everyone in the US to Just Get Along with each other.

So when asked, "R or D"? the proper reponse is For Unity.Or in short form, just answer FU.

@95 I am not "arguing about the types" I am specifically asking rumpole5 to back up his claim. yes, I am engaging in dialectic, yes, he was using rhetoric/pseudo-dialectic, and if I wished to persuade him, I should respond with rhetoric, but I don't care about persuading him. I just want him to defend his claim.

Did you listen to talk radio at all this last week? Did you hear the CO Republican Chair was in hiding? Yes, this blew up in their faces. You just don't like it when Trump nails the GOPe with an effective rhetorical attack.

No.No.Why would I care one whit if Trump nails the GOPe? I certainly don't have a soft spot for the GOPe and I don't personally dislike Trump. I rather enjoy a good bullshitter and Trump is a top shelf bullshitter extraordinaire. Still, that doesn't make it anything other than bullshit.

Of course, the fallacy in this argument is equating the actual election to public office with the selection of a particular political party's nominee. Every political party has a right to select their nominee in any way they choose - including simply appointing someone to the nomination.

Comparing the election in Syria of someone who actually holds government power to selecting a party's candidate for office is comparing apples to oranges.

And in the United States, the parties is each state are semi-autonomous, and have a right to select the nominee for that state in any way they so choose.

How is it that the Libertarian Party already has a nominee, prior to all these states voting? Did they disenfranchise the voters? What exactly is the logic behind the idea that non Republicans should get a voice in who the Republican nominee is?

If Colorado voted in the General Election by not allowing the general population its voice, then I would agree that the voters of Colorado were disenfranchised. But the Republicans in Colorado decided to select their nominee based according to a way which passed a vote among Colorado Republicans. I can understand why non Republicans wish the could undermine the will of Republicans. But I don't understand the argument that the will of Republicans in Colorado was somehow thwarted.

Democracy ≠ open primaries, and you Trump fans wouldn't have a goddamn thing to say about legitimacy if your boy had won in Colorado. Thou hypocrites!

Also:

The Western governments are far out on a limb with their lies that the Syrian people prefer to be governed by the Washington supported terrorists who were overrunning their country and conducting with Western supplied weapons mass murder on the Syrian people until Russia put a stop to it.

What a long and unwieldy sentence; maybe it was pithier in the original Russian.

Every political party has a right to select their nominee in any way they choose - including simply appointing someone to the nomination.

And the reporter has the right to care more about the train than the people, but that doesn't mean the rest of us can't mock him for it.

If this private organization you aspies keep talking about wants to ask for the support of people who are expressing serious doubts about how democratic or even representative our political process is, maybe they shouldn't act like quite so much the out of touch elitist oligarchs their critics say they are.

Here is the question by Chris Wallace about the Trump Corp. bankruptcy (as described by the news site The Hill): "Well sir, let’s just talk about the latest example, which is Trump Entertainment Resorts, which went bankrupt in 2009,” Wallace said. “In that case alone lenders to your company lost over $1 billion and more than 1,100 people were laid off.”

Trump responded by criticizing the banks he was in business with, aWell sir, let’s just talk about the latest example, which is Trump Entertainment Resorts, which went bankrupt in 2009,” Wallace said. “In that case alone lenders to your company lost over $1 billion and more than 1,100 people were laid off.”

Trump responded by criticizing the banks he was in business with, and by suggesting the question was naive.

Trump never denied the substance to the allegations that investors and employees lost money in the bankruptcy.

I prosecuted my last first degree murder trial in 1999 , so my evidence law might be a bit rusty, but I believe that the failure to deny an allegation where a resonable person would have done so is admissible evidence of the truth of the allegation. Trump never denied the substance of Wallace's question. Instead Trump claimed the right to follow the bankruptcy rules

Both Ted Cruz and Donald Trump have extensive history linking them to the political establishment. Both have criticized the cuckservative /RINO Republican section of that establishment. My point is that there is a good chance that Cruz will be considerably more responsive to the electorate than what we have had. If Trump will ignore his progressive past, and do what he promises, he might even be better. I will vote for either man if he makes it to the nomination, and you should too.

@106 rumpole5 Wallace wasn't a judge, and Trump wasn't under oath to tell the truth, the whole...blah blah. He was being interviewed by a talking head.

Here's what I find on the 2009 Bankruptcy of Trump Entertainment Resorts

'Since the second bankruptcy filing in 2004, Trump has only owned about a quarter of the casino operation, although he continued to serve as Chairman of the Board until February. According to the court filing, the company had $2.06 billion in assets and more than $1.74 billion in liabilities. In order to save the company, Trump made an offer to buy the company and take it private. But he claims that bond holders and "their allies on the board" refused his offer. When the offer was refused, the Trumps walked.

Trump says, "I have nothing to do with [the bankruptcy]. I have nothing to do with the company. I am not involved in the management of the company. I'm not on the board any longer," (FOX News, February 18, 2009).'

Sounds to me like it was the board that wanted to file Bankruptcy. Trump tried to buy it and take it private.

***"The rules in Colorado were changed specifically to stop Ted Cruz. Cruz saw what was going on and outwitted his opponents. Trump was clueless."***

False, False, and false.

The rules were changed in Colorado to allow the CO GOPe leadership to pick the delegates for the preferred GOPe candidate.

When the rules were changed, it looked like Jeb! was going to be the GOPe preferred candidate.

By the time the non-vote happened, Cruz! was the GOPe preferred candidate because Cruz! is the only one left who can stop Trump, ie prevent him from getting the majority of delegates on the first ballot.

Cruz! is owned lock-stock-and-barrel by Goldman Sachs. That's why a natural born Canadian citizen, one term US senator, mass immigration H1B loving alleged conservative, is so acceptable to the GOPe. Because he is owned.

Cruz! didn't "outwit" anyone. He was gifted those CO delegates.

Cruz! was chosen by the CO GOPe; who tweeted #NeverTrump just in case you were too clueless to figure out why they did what they did.

Trump was not clueless; he did not waste time money and resources trying to win a fixed process he had no hope of winning.

For all you autists out there going on and on about "teh ruulz! Trump didn't know teh ruulz!": please take a refresher course in how "the rules" actually work in practice, courtesy of the Hitchhikers Guide the the Galaxy:

MISTER PROSSER: But Mister Dent the plans have been available in the planning office for the last nine months!

ARTHUR DENT: Yes! I went round to find them yesterday afternoon. You’d hadn’texactly gone out of your way to pull much attention to them have you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything.

MISTER PROSSER: The plans were on display.

ARTHUR DENT: Ah! And how many members of the public are in the habit of casually dropping around the local planning office of an evening?

MISTER PROSSER: Er – ah!

ARTHUR DENT: It’s not exactly a noted social venue is it? And even if you had popped in on the off chance that some raving bureaucrat wanted to knock your house down, the plans weren’t immediately obvious to the eye were they?

MISTER PROSSER: That depends where you were looking.

ARTHUR DENT: I eventually had to go down to the cellar!

MISTER PROSSER: That’s the display department.

ARTHUR DENT: With a torch!

MISTER PROSSER: The lights, had… probably gone.

ARTHUR DENT: So had the stairs!

MISTER PROSSER: Well you found the notice didn’t you?

ARTHUR DENT: Yes. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet, stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying “Beware of the Leopard”. Ever thought of going into advertising?

Cruz just disenfranchised voters in a Georgia district today. This time there was a vote, and by that vote 2/3 delegates went for Trump, one for Rubio. But today they assigned them, and Cruz forces stole it. The Trump manager who had brought the ceremonial American flag walked off with it, and the whole Trump delegation, in protest.

So that's even worse than Colorado. It's bad enough to deny you a vote, it's ten times worse when you allow it then override the result.

You think it's somehow significant that the GOP CO chair laid low for a couple days? Hahaha! What, precisely, has blown up other than a media shitstorm that means absolutely nothing? Just like the Fields-Lewandowski debacle, this will have zero impact and result in nothing of consequence. "...a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more: it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

The way I've been hearing it, the national rules changed so that the national convention will consider delegates for each state will be bound to the allocation decided by that state's preference poll, if there is a preference poll in that state.

If there is not a preference poll in a state, that state's delegates can vote however they want.

So, Colorado decided not to have a poll, since they don't want their delegates to be bound. The delegates have always been chosen by the "good old boy" network, and that hasn't changed. Literally the only thing that has changed is that the party stopped sticking their finger up to see which way the wind was blowing.

The press has been reporting this as Trump is upset that Cruz stole his delegates. So far, all of the actual quotes I've tracked down have been about the GOP insiders disenfranchising the voters.

Are you going to the MN state convention next month? Is anyone else here? I am, and I wouldn't mind organizing a meetup for VD readers and/or The_Donald subscribers.

I think I'm going to file for the national convention too. I think the odds are pretty long, and I'm not keen on the party sending my personal info to 870 of their closest friends, but I've been on a civic-mindedness tear lately.

Well how bout that - I'm using Pale Moon, and my comment disappeared when I refreshed the page - I tried again - same deal - I just restarted the browser and now both comments have returned in their original places.

The alt - right basically has the same fatal flaw the libertarians do. That is the nutty belief in conspiracy theories about how the USA does or does not get involved in foreign affairs. Everything the USA does is evil, this and evil that, blah, blah, blah, some of you idiots comparing Syria to Colorado, or the idiotic comment about how the USA overthrew the Ukrainian government as examples. All of them bona fide conspiracy theories, which you idiots will deny. I mean, what the GOP did in Colorado was deceitful it cannot be compared to whatsoem you morons think is a fair election of Assad and his mouthpieces in parliament, Congress or whatever the hell they call it in Syria. Fact is Assad is a dicatator responsible for tens of thousands of deaths some of them in gruesome, without him there is no ISIS as it is today. I make the same argument for you putzes that call people Hitler that have a different idealogy.

Fact is Assad is a dicatator responsible for tens of thousands of deaths some of them in gruesome

If you have moslems the only way you can have things safe for Christians jews & gays is to be utterly brutal to moslems, as that is the only thing they understand. The I need a Pinochet song from youtube:

I need a Pinochet, I need a Pinochet to free up all the markets tonight. Privatize Industry, open up trade, and sentence all leftists to die. I need a Pinochet, I need a Pinochet to force massive repeals overnight. Stop the inflation, stabilize currency, and sentence the all the leftists to die ...I need a Pinochet, I need a Pinochet to send the helicopters to flight. Round up the commies, fly over main street, And drop them from a staggering height.I need a Pinochet, I need a Pinochet to barricade the borders tonight. Stop immigration, terminate welfare, and deport all illegals in sight.

Trump made an admission by silence. Under oath, vel non is irrelevant. You asked for proof that folks suffered losses from Trump 's corporate bankruptcy, and I gave you evidence that would be admissible in court. Then you change the subject and try to disassociate Trump from a Trump corporation. Lame. - that is exactly why folks incorporate!

I've spent my entire life sucking up to whatever seems to be the strongest and most popular thing to suck up to, and if you vote for me I will continue to suck up to whatever seems to be the strongest and most popular

I need a Pinochet, I need a Pinochet to free up all the markets tonight. Privatize Industry, open up trade, and sentence all leftists to die. I need a Pinochet, I need a Pinochet to force massive repeals overnight. Stop the inflation, stabilize currency, and sentence the all the leftists to die ...

I need a Pinochet, I need a Pinochet to send the helicopters to flight. Round up the commies, fly over main street, And drop them from a staggering height.

I need a Pinochet, I need a Pinochet to barricade the borders tonight. Stop immigration, terminate welfare, and deport all illegals in sight.

There's something strangely familiar about all this. ;)

Post a Comment

Rules of the blogPlease do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.